Computed radiography continues to offer healthcare providers a cost-effective ride into
digital imaging, winning the attention of people looking for efficiency and a price tag
that wont lead to sticker shock.
Computed radiography is a lot like a collectable car. Both have
been to numerous shows, have undergone many improvements and seem to be valued more with
time. CR continues to offer facilities a cost-effective ride into digital imaging, winning
the attention of people looking for efficiency and a price tag that wont give them
sticker shock. Proponents say CR is far from dated technology. As orthopedic surgeons
embark on CR for long-length imaging and radiologists wait for CR mammography to run the
FDA obstacle course, computed radiography continues to capture the interest of medical
facilities.
Industry Analyst Antonio Garcia of Frost & Sullivans (San Jose, Calif.)
Medical Imaging Research Group sees CRs place in the market as secure for now.
A number of people were thinking that CR would wilt away as more DR models came on
the market, but I think what were seeing is that DR has not reached a price point
where you can go in and replace all those existing x-ray machines with a digital
radiography system, Garcia says. Even if you could replace [several] x-ray
machines with one DR machine, that still hasnt reached a price point where that is
financially viable for most facilities to do.
With the high throughput CR readers and the price advantage, the CR market has
demonstrated appeal, according to Garcia. If there were an issue with image quality,
I think that would make people think twice, but because there really isnt a big
issue, there really are no significant differences in the quality generated by CR vs. DR,
people are saying We get the same quality [more affordably], so lets go with
CR.
At Lahey Clinic (Burlington, Mass.), CR has improved efficiency and markedly reduced
patient waiting time to get image results. Prior to CR, a patient would come down from the
referring physicians office to radiology and wait an average of four and a half to
six and a half hours to get a study done. Now the wait times are down to 22 minutes,
and thats a mean, says Anna Chacko, M.D., chairman of radiology at Lahey.
Most wait less than that.
The QC is accomplished instantaneously. That makes such a huge difference, and
with cassetteless radiology, the image is available almost instantaneously, Chacko
says. This consequently improves throughput [and] of course translates to the fact
that we now have time on our schedule to do more patients, where before we
didnt. Lahey uses Fujifilm Medical Systems Inc.s (Stamford, Conn.) Speed
Suite and the SmartCR
Please refer to the April 2003
issue for the complete story.
For information on article reprints, contact
Martin St. Denis